User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 64

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    We simply have a misunderstanding.

    I am referring to those who are addicted to playing psychological games.

    I am not referring to those who play formal games on the internet.

    I think our misunderstanding arises because both are referred to as game players.

    Whereas I am only referring to those who are addicted to playing psychological games,
    So you weren't talking about us gamers. I've never heard of a person who plays psychological games being referred to as a "gamer"... though it wouldn't be inaccurate.

    Random thought... imagine an MMORPG dedicated to playing psychological mind games with each other. Lol!

  2. #42
    Senior Member FC3S's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    666
    Socionics
    777
    Posts
    371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyWench View Post
    So you weren't talking about us gamers. I've never heard of a person who plays psychological games being referred to as a "gamer"... though it wouldn't be inaccurate.

    Random thought... imagine an MMORPG dedicated to playing psychological mind games with each other. Lol!
    Load up an MMORPG that has a main chat channel, most of them do. As a good safety measure, make sure there are quite a few players on (potential lurkers [tm]), also make sure the main chat channel is busy.

    Now, observe the regulars. There will usually be someone with massive SKILLLZZZ, it'll almost always be a male, so he'll be aggressive, he'll probably be pretentious from all the sucking up other players do.

    Call him out on his BS when he's clearly in the wrong. Enjoy.

    This works wonders in racing games, strangely enough.
    ESTP - Definition: "Love" is making a shot to the knees of a target a 120 km away, with an aratech sniper rifle and tri-light scope.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  3. #43
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyWench View Post
    So you weren't talking about us gamers. I've never heard of a person who plays psychological games being referred to as a "gamer"... though it wouldn't be inaccurate.

    Random thought... imagine an MMORPG dedicated to playing psychological mind games with each other. Lol!
    I do though sometimes wonder if there is a connection between formal game playing on the internet and psychological game playing.

    It's plain that psychological game playing is not a mental illness, however psychological game playing is a psychological defence.

    So I wonder whether formal game playing on the internet is also a psychological defence.

    It seems to me that both types of gamers have no insight into what they are doing.

    So it seems both types are defending against their own psyche.

    And of course they have no idea how ridiculous and absurd and pathetic they are, because all they are focused on jusit winning the game.

    And it is interesting that this is the way they treat personal relationships - as game to win.

    So game players are to be avoided except of course by other game players.

  4. #44
    Senior Member FC3S's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    666
    Socionics
    777
    Posts
    371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I do though sometimes wonder if there is a connection between formal game playing on the internet and psychological game playing.

    It's plain that psychological game playing is not a mental illness, however psychological game playing is a psychological defence.

    So I wonder whether formal game playing on the internet is also a psychological defence.

    It seems to me that both types of gamers have no insight into what they are doing.

    So it seems both types are defending against their own psyche.

    And of course they have no idea how ridiculous and absurd and pathetic they are, because all they are focused on it winning the game.

    And it is interesting that this is the way they treat personal relationships - as game to win.

    So game players are to be avoided except of course by other game players.
    Just...

    Winning...

    The game?...

    :horor:

    It is not just about... using skillz and going ... in for the kill.

    It is to be savored. And it is even better with rivals - equally skilled rivals. You really have to bust out every stop - that takes thinking in realtime - insight, the adaption, the hunt and thrill of battle.

    You have no idea what you are talking about.
    ESTP - Definition: "Love" is making a shot to the knees of a target a 120 km away, with an aratech sniper rifle and tri-light scope.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  5. #45
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    We simply have a misunderstanding.

    I am referring to those who are addicted to playing psychological games.

    I am not referring to those who play formal games on the internet.

    I think our misunderstanding arises because both are referred to as game players.

    Whereas I am only referring to those who are addicted to playing psychological games,
    Bahaha, isn't it awesome how he took your use of the term "games" totally literally though? "WTF IS WRONG WITH VIDEO GAMES???"


    Quote Originally Posted by professor goodstain View Post
    MBTI is theoretical. Only 'theoretically' are you fucking with a certain group of people. If, per chance, MBTI is a complete fallacy....you are only fucking with yourself
    sigh. Can't you kids learn your terms before making jokes you don't understand?

    It's not a fallacy--by definition, it CAN'T be a fallacy because it doesn't operate within deductive reasoning. MBTI is neither totally reliable nor totally unreliable; it's an inductive scale with varying possible degrees of accuracy. Just like nearly everything else in real life, it doesn't operate in definite or black and white terms. I don't consider it either "all totally 100% right" or "completely and entirely 0% right" because it's obviously neither. It's not a religious dogma, for fuck's sake.

    And since it's neither scientific nor measurable, deductive reasoning terms like "fallacy" are totally inapplicable. Saying "MBTI could be a fallacy" is simply meaningless, and it betrays a poor understanding of the word.

    Asking for deductive reasoning to prove that I'm an ENTP is like asking for scientific proof that Led Zeppelin was a rock band. "Rock band" and "ENTP" are both arbitrarily made up terms that some people choose to use to describe a given set of characteristics. These characteristics are neither quantifiable nor objectively standardized; there is only a general consensus. You don't have to see any numbers to gain perceptive utility from organizing the data that way.

    I'm starting to wonder how anyone could possibly misunderstand this concept so badly, but apparently there are a lot of you.

    What if the idea that music should be placed into categories like "rock", "rap" or "R&B" is a total fallacy??? I GUESS MUSIC CRITICS ARE JUST FUCKING WITH THEMSELVES LOL

    sigh.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Bahaha, isn't it awesome how he took your use of the term "games" totally literally though? "WTF IS WRONG WITH VIDEO GAMES???"




    sigh. Can't you kids learn your terms before making jokes you don't understand?

    It's not a fallacy--by definition, it CAN'T be a fallacy because it doesn't operate within deductive reasoning. MBTI is neither totally reliable nor totally unreliable; it's an inductive scale with varying possible degrees of accuracy. Just like nearly everything else in real life, it doesn't operate in definite or black and white terms. I don't consider it either "all totally 100% right" or "completely and entirely 0% right" because it's obviously neither. It's not a religious dogma, for fuck's sake.

    And since it's neither scientific nor measurable, deductive reasoning terms like "fallacy" are totally inapplicable. Saying "MBTI could be a fallacy" is simply meaningless, and it betrays a poor understanding of the word.

    Asking for deductive reasoning to prove that I'm an ENTP is like asking for scientific proof that Led Zeppelin was a rock band. "Rock band" and "ENTP" are both arbitrarily made up terms that some people choose to use to describe a given set of characteristics. These characteristics are neither quantifiable nor objectively standardized; there is only a general consensus. You don't have to see any numbers to gain perceptive utility from organizing the data that way.

    I'm starting to wonder how anyone could possibly misunderstand this concept so badly, but apparently there are a lot of you.

    What if the idea that music should be placed into categories like "rock", "rap" or "R&B" is a total fallacy??? I GUESS MUSIC CRITICS ARE JUST FUCKING WITH THEMSELVES LOL

    sigh.
    Fallacy

    1. A false notion.
    2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
    3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
    4. The quality of being deceptive.
    You continue to prove yourself mentally deficient, by your own words.

  7. #47
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaltyWench View Post
    You continue to prove yourself mentally deficient, by your own words.
    Umm...

    Were you trying to prove my point, or did that just happen by accident?

    My whole point is that MBTI can't be a "false notion" because it's not a notion at all. It's simply a frame of reference, an arbitrary method of organizing data: it can't be right or wrong because it isn't a statement of deductive reasoning.

    It's simply, "I choose to arbitrarily place people who act this way into this made up category."

    Nevermind, you weren't trying to prove my point, you're just waaaay behind.


    EDIT: An explanation is probably necessary here.

    We can observe the following simply by watching people:

    --People exhibit certain behaviors under certain conditions
    --Different people are more prone to certain behaviors under certain conditions than others
    --If we watch people, we can make somewhat useful inferences about the way they will probably tend to behave, though we cannot predict exactly what they will do at any given time.

    If you can explain some reason this is not true, I'd love to hear it.

    From there, it's all arbitrary categorizing and labeling. The very definitions of the types are themselves subjective because MBTI doesn't purport to be scientific. Isn't it obvious from reading the "type analysis" posts on this board? Or don't you actually read any of the posts/make any attempt to grasp the methodology being used?

    There's this whole little group of you that runs around parroting the same garbage about judging whether MBTI is "true" or "false" as if it's one singular idea with inherent, measurable truth or falsehood. That's SO missing the point. Please, please read this:

    Don't they teach this shit in freshman year of college anymore?

    Inductive arguments fundamentally can't be evaluated in terms of absolute truth value, because they don't suggest positive or absolute truths: only probabilities about what may happen next, based on observing past trends.

    If you understand the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning, you will see why MBTI isn't judged in terms of truth or falsehood. It's neither objective nor quantifiable.

    I'm sorry, that's probably too many big words for an ESTP. You should just beat me with a chair to prove how wrong I am.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Beating you with a chair is a tempting offer. Explosives would be rather fun as well. But I digress.

    Are we actually going to get into a pissing contest over how incorrect something has to be in order to be considered "false"? My point was that the word fallacy has several different shades of meaning. It had not been used incorrectly.

    Let's use your example of music, since all musical genres are "arbitrary". I'll say that Miley Cyrus is death metal. Now, let's ask members of some death metal bands if they agree. I guarantee that after they have a good, long horse laugh they'll have a laundry list of reasons why she should not be classified as death metal. Wrong vocals, different instruments, pop beats, teeny bopper lyrical content... etc. Where's the screaming? The blast beats? The drums? The gloomy lyrics? Sure, it's all subjective opinion, but if enough people perceive her music as sounding too different from death metal to be classified within that category, there is a good chance that the notion is false.

    Notion

    1. A belief or opinion.
    2. A mental image or representation; an idea or conception.
    3. A fanciful impulse; a whim. Synonym: idea.
    Ideas, beliefs or opinions can all be subjective. Therefore, an incorrect belief or idea (notion) would equal a fallacy.

  9. #49
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    You seem to have a particular talent for proving my points for me.

    The way you've shown that Miley Cyrus is very probably not death metal is effective inductive reasoning.

    But we still haven't proven this in objectively measurable terms--Te terms, if you will. The problem here is one of interpretation. If we reason that MBTI types, like musical genres, cannot be determined objectively, we must conclude that they are subjective.

    And why on Earth would we question the factual accuracy of any system that is subjective?

    That is silly, like asking for absolute certainty through measurable evidence that Miley Cirus is not death metal. After all, if it's my opinion that she is death metal, you can't objectively prove me wrong with total certainty...

    ...you can only use induction to show a high probability that I am wrong for calling Miley Cyrus a death metal artist. It's unscientific because there's no clinical test that can be done to establish for certain that death metal sounds a certain way--there's only a general consensus among "informed people" about what death metal sounds like. See how it doesn't operate in terms of absolutely provable right or wrong?

    It's just "X% probability of accuracy." That's how real world decision-making works--the problem of perception bias means we rarely have total objective certainty about anything. We use induction all the time without scientific proof, and it's perfectly reasonable.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xxxx
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It's just "X% probability of accuracy." That's how real world decision-making works--the problem of perception bias means we rarely have total objective certainty about anything. We use induction all the time without scientific proof, and it's perfectly reasonable.
    I just can't help myself. I have to ask. Wouldn't the polling of a large group of people help with the perception bias?

    This has actually been a lot of fun, debating this back and forth with you. When I have time, I will read the link you posted earlier too. It looks interesting.

Similar Threads

  1. Open-mindedness explained
    By INTP in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-13-2012, 12:11 PM
  2. Smart Definition of Open-mindedness
    By Kangol in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-04-2009, 09:20 PM
  3. Open-mindedness: A Universal Virtue
    By Bubbles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-24-2009, 01:33 AM
  4. [NT] NT's and open mindedness......
    By tinkerbell in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 09-12-2008, 12:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO